Russia places extraordinary demands on OneWeb prior to satellite launch
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Economic interdependence has historically been pretty effective at preventing wars.
Cooperation with the USSR during the cold war (and countries like Russia afterwards) have, historically, been meant to reduce the chance of war as well as create change (see: democritization of eastern Europe).
Upvote
59
(60
/
-1)
Seems on brand, and no wonder the demands were so outrageous to a point of being never accepted.
We have a saying in Latin America, musica paga no suena, which goes roughly: music already being payed doesn´t sound. If this wasn´t known by the higher ups on a company, something is terrible wrong in said company.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
Due to ITAR Russia has in the past avoided the temptation to steal commercial sat tech. China did it and 20+ years later China is still an absolute nothing in the commercial sat market.
At this point though I wouldn't be surprised if the sats and tech is stolen. Russia is just digging their own grave. World pariah and failed petrol state. Nobody will ever risk launching on a Russian launcher again.
Honestly NASA should make plans to return the NASA astronaut scheduled to return on Soyuz spacecraft by Dragon or Starliner. At this point entirely possible he will be arrested as a spy.
Upvote
110
(111
/
-1)
BRICS MAY comprise of 48% of the world's population, but that's only because the two most populated nations on Earth, India and China, are part of it. B=Brazil, R=Russia, I=India, C=China, S=South America, which are the five founding nations. Every nation on that list has an economic incentive to play nice with Russia (which is why it's important to pick your allies carefully!), and most of those nations are pretty low on the economic totem pole. Here are some numbers:
Brazil: 9,928USD/cap GDP (2017)
Russia: 11,498USD/cap GDP (2018)
India: 2,101USD/cap GDP (2019)
China: 10,143USD/cap GDP (2019)
South Africa: 7,005USD/cap GDP (2018)
Total GDP of all nations above: 20.51753t USD (China makes up the biggest share with 13.8t USD).
This is before the COVID pandemic for some farer comparisons.
Now, let's compare some Non-BRICS country GDPs.
USA: total 20.936t USD (2020). Note that this is larger than BRICS combined...
EU: total 13.39t USD (2020): Note that this is almost as large as China's GDP, despite being half China's population.
Canada: total 1.643t USD (2020)
South Korea: 1.63t USD (2020)
Japan: 5.06t USD (2020): Only China beats Japan's GDP from BRICS.
If we add this all up, we're talking a GDP that's double BRICS, and that's comparing BRICS at the height of their economies to the West in the grip of COVID! That should make this comparison pretty equal.
China and India are quite aware of this. They've stopped at outright renouncing the invasion of Ukraine, but both are put in a rough spot, and they aren't exactly happy with Russia on this development. China wants access to US and EU markets, because that's how they got to where they are right now. India is already preparing to disentangle itself with Russia because the price of cooperation with a 1.4t USD economy is losing access to 30 Russias worth of economy. South Africa's draft presentation to the UN included a line that Russia must withdraw from Ukraine and dialogue must be had before politics struck it out. Even Brazil is having to toe a very narrow line lest the already crippling sanctions get worse.
I'm not convinced that 48% of the world is actually pro-Russia-Invasion either. Their government certainly is not keen on breaking up BRICS, but if Russia's not careful, BRICS may just turn into BICS as Russia will become North Korea levels of toxic. And Russia's not finding the level of support it hoped to find from China, again due to China's worry that supporting Russia means losing access to the economies that made it strong in the first place.
Biden was right. Putin miscalculated and made a grave mistake. He can still reverse this, by withdrawing his armies at least back into the 'republics' he's recognised, if not completely back to Russia. But he hasn't so far and shows no indication he will. We'll see how strong BRICS unity is, but at this stage of the game, it's not looking good for the R in BRICS.
Upvote
81
(81
/
0)
And there we have the Brexit plan in a nutshell:
1) Give the fingers to your nearest neighbours and chuck out all your partners/allies
2) Jump into bed with China and Russia
3) ...
4) Sovereignty!
/s
1) Give the fingers to your nearest neighbours and chuck out all your partners/allies
2) Jump into bed with China and Russia
3) ...
4) Sovereignty!
/s
Upvote
32
(43
/
-11)
W
The I is India which is historically non-aligned and also Russia-friendly since the 1960s. Their entire weapon platforms are also Russian-based which makes it very tricky to go against Russia or risk getting cutoff from provision/maintenance/support of their existing armament base. India is in a very sticky position of all the BRICS nations because it is seeking support from the US to counter China which is a friend of Russia who is a friend of India who is a enemy of Pakistan who is seeking to be friends with Russia. Something in this Pentagon of relations does not compute, the relationships are unstable.
India will have to pick either US friendship to have anti-China support and leave Russia behind OR accept Chinese dominance of India's sphere of influence and stick with Russia.
The B is Brazil which is going down the path of authoritarianism with Bolsonaro.
The S is South Africa which has also historically been non-aligned (like India).
All 5 nations can easily change their stance by changing 5 people's minds. There is no statement of global disunity just from BRICS abstaining from a UN vote.
What kind of inane troll logic is this? The R in BRICS is Russia itself. The C is China which is very democratic and pro-humanitarian as we all know. (/s)
The I is India which is historically non-aligned and also Russia-friendly since the 1960s. Their entire weapon platforms are also Russian-based which makes it very tricky to go against Russia or risk getting cutoff from provision/maintenance/support of their existing armament base. India is in a very sticky position of all the BRICS nations because it is seeking support from the US to counter China which is a friend of Russia who is a friend of India who is a enemy of Pakistan who is seeking to be friends with Russia. Something in this Pentagon of relations does not compute, the relationships are unstable.
India will have to pick either US friendship to have anti-China support and leave Russia behind OR accept Chinese dominance of India's sphere of influence and stick with Russia.
The B is Brazil which is going down the path of authoritarianism with Bolsonaro.
The S is South Africa which has also historically been non-aligned (like India).
All 5 nations can easily change their stance by changing 5 people's minds. There is no statement of global disunity just from BRICS abstaining from a UN vote.
Upvote
49
(49
/
0)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
Economic interdepence between DEMOCRACIES has been effective at preventing wars.
The whole "we should trade with despots" because trade will bring liberalization has been a 30+ year utter fail.
That was the argument for both China and Russia and all it has done is enrich our adversaries.
Upvote
56
(61
/
-5)
Why should there be little political interest in helping them out? Because of Brexit? Look, I get it that the EU would rather they stayed in the EU, but whatever. They are a major economy, and a democracy, and part of NATO. Get over it. They left, it's done. The EU should still seek to do business with them. If for no other reason, than to keep them from doing business with the likes of Russia and China.
Before there was an EU, countries managed to figure out how to do beneficial trade deals with each other, and the EU needs to not throw a fit, and just do business with the UK the same way they would do business with the US who is also not a member of the EU. I mean, does the EU really not want to do business with the UK? That seems like it hurts EU members as much as it hurts the UK.
Upvote
30
(31
/
-1)
There's no such thing as independant space. Even if you manufacture and launch the rockets locally, their parts won't be. Chip manufacturing requires worldwide resources... and if you use any titanium in this rocket.
I'm still unclear on what the difference between a local builder (SpaceX-Europe coming into existance) and a government entity is in this case. I don't see anyone decrying that there's no government-owned ground vehicle manufacture in Europe.
Maybe it's just the American in me smarting from my tax dollars going for SLS and Orion and in return getting far less science and space stuff than if 1/10th of that were going to SpaceX; but I'm a bit disillusioned with government run rocket construction of late.
Upvote
-10
(5
/
-15)
Why isn't OneWeb just "agreeing" to these terms and then tell Russia to get f... err that there has been a change of plans late,r once the starts are done?
I mean, it doesn't sound as if there is any base of trust anyway, and these demands are probably a breach of contract too... soo... might as well burn the last bridges too to get these satellite into the air. It's not as if OneWeb will ask Russia for launches ever again after this.
I mean, it doesn't sound as if there is any base of trust anyway, and these demands are probably a breach of contract too... soo... might as well burn the last bridges too to get these satellite into the air. It's not as if OneWeb will ask Russia for launches ever again after this.
Upvote
10
(13
/
-3)
I would say longer than 30 years. Didn't Nixon open up trade with China in the 1970s? So that's what, 45 or 50 years?
Upvote
14
(16
/
-2)
Clearly, now that idea-paradigm has to be re-assessed. Not saying it is untrue, though, just that because of this precedent, it has the be heavily modified.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)
[BULLSHIT REDACTED]
I think from a numbers perspective Musk is more or less correct here.
The primary problem with Musk is that he's a fairly prolific shitposter and that muddies the waters quite a bit.
The original poster of this tweet is fascist troll who seems to have missed the point of the tweet.
I think from a numbers perspective Musk is more or less correct here.
The primary problem with Musk is that he's a fairly prolific shitposter and that muddies the waters quite a bit.
The original poster of this tweet is fascist troll who seems to have missed the point of the tweet.
Upvote
63
(68
/
-5)
jhymesba2, why do you have to ninja me like that and with a more informative post as well? /s
But really, you put it in terms that no one sincerely can misunderstand. Russia is a deep dark hole they dug themselves and chose to jump in and now they have the temerity to demand that the world falls in the hole with them.
Yeah, good luck with that, Mr. Putin khuylo!
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
As some others have mentioned, I do not understand the logic insisting that OneWeb can't launch on Falcon 9.
Perhaps I would understand the argument if there was a strategy to freeze out SpaceX and force them to abandon StarLink, but the launch provider arm of SpaceX is FAR too established to vulnerable to missing out on the contract for one constellation. This is especially true if Falcon 9's launch rate is significantly capped by their ability to produce second stages, which seems likely.
OneWeb probably initially chose Soyuz because they were getting a good price and schedule guarantee, with the PR benefit of not launching on a competitor's rocket being only a minor factor. Now the calculus has changed dramatically, and I'm confident OneWeb will launch on Falcon 9 if that's the provider that can provide the best price and schedule package.
In fact, if OneWeb does not end up launching on Falcon 9, I think it's likely a situation where SpaceX is unable or unwilling to make space for them in their immediate launch manifest.
Perhaps I would understand the argument if there was a strategy to freeze out SpaceX and force them to abandon StarLink, but the launch provider arm of SpaceX is FAR too established to vulnerable to missing out on the contract for one constellation. This is especially true if Falcon 9's launch rate is significantly capped by their ability to produce second stages, which seems likely.
OneWeb probably initially chose Soyuz because they were getting a good price and schedule guarantee, with the PR benefit of not launching on a competitor's rocket being only a minor factor. Now the calculus has changed dramatically, and I'm confident OneWeb will launch on Falcon 9 if that's the provider that can provide the best price and schedule package.
In fact, if OneWeb does not end up launching on Falcon 9, I think it's likely a situation where SpaceX is unable or unwilling to make space for them in their immediate launch manifest.
Upvote
26
(27
/
-1)
Speaking of space, Elon Musk - you know, the dude who runs spaceX, had some choice words for our sleepy, drooly, Prez:
Nah. Musk is just an anti-president guy specifically for presidents that tend to fight against Covid.
The President is trying to make a point about how great unions are for America. This is why he only mentioned Ford and GM when speaking about electric vehicles during the State of the Union address, and intentionally left out Tesla.
Whether or not unions are good or bad is up to you, but it's a political/union disagreement between Musk and Biden, and nothing to do with the pandemic.
Upvote
82
(83
/
-1)
And that is exactly the relativism the got us Trump in the US, and that Trump uses to justify anything his lizard thuggish brain tells him to do - recall his interview with O’Reilly where he responded to ‘Putin is a killer’ with ‘so are we’.
The US is not without its flaws, but this day, we are not invading another country and bombing its cities nor are we quietly ethnically cleansing a minority and putting them in concentrations camps.
Upvote
38
(42
/
-4)
I love it, "aggressive policy of the West" - like illegally invading a sovereign nation isn't aggressive. Shit may fly in the motherland, but not in the rest of the world
Upvote
39
(39
/
0)
Was the cold war era full of hot wars I missed?
Did Vietnam get on a revenge streak and attack us recently?
[/quote]
So East Germany, Urkrane, etc. didn't actually have revolutions that moved them towards democratization?
Let's compare two countries that we haven't traded with to two that we have and see which are more despotic, shall we?
We've been embargoing Cuba and North Korea for 50 years. Would you say the outcome there has been better than the outcome in China or Vietnam?
This invasion of Ukrane stands out precisely because this is what *hasn't* been happening.
And these economic sactions that we are now using that are exerting pressure on Russia to change course? These are possible only because there was economic trade before... and if you think fear of economic consequence isn't part of the calculation for, say, China; I'd say your position isn't grounded in fact.
Upvote
13
(18
/
-5)
Putin's massive strategic face-plant is pretty ironic from the leader of a country that reveres chess. He seems to have miscalculated on so many fronts.
Upvote
22
(22
/
0)
Tell the russians yes, and yes. Launch the satellites, then renege, eff 'em. And I think one of those rich russian putin friends owns a big football club in Britain; nationalize it.
Upvote
0
(4
/
-4)
It's not at all like that.
Firefly is a US company. The US has every right to tell foreign investors whether they can invest in it. This is how national sovereignty works. Sovereign nations control the flow of capital and technology across their borders.
OneWeb is a UK company. Russia has absolutely no right to tell the UK who can or can't invest in it. And them trying to do so is certainly extraordinary. Sovereign nations do not control capital investment and technology transfer activities inside other sovereign nations.
Upvote
56
(58
/
-2)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
It isn't just US dollars. Every major government has frozen Russian central bank assets. If Russia had zero dollars and all Euros (or Pounds or Yen) they would have the same problem.
The only major currency holding not being frozen is Chinese Yuan. So yeah those are your choices:
a) don't be such an aggressive sociopath and danger to the world that you are subject to the unprecedented step of having your central bank assets frozen
OR
b) hold all of it in Chinese Yuan the most manipulated major currency in the world
Upvote
57
(58
/
-1)
Russia and what army is going to do that?
They demonstrated anti-satellite capability. They didn’t demonstrate that they have a large number of them.
Upvote
33
(33
/
0)
You are correct, and cooperation with Russia was never a mistake. Creating a dependence on them however was not the best move (looking at you here Germany)
Upvote
48
(48
/
0)
Just agree to the demands. Don't adhere to them but definitely agree to them. This will either free the hostaged satellites or shine an even brighter light on Russia's Russia-ness. (I'm guessing the latter.)
Upvote
-5
(1
/
-6)
Or, you know, maybe not invade another country and threaten or piss off countries in four continents - from Germany to Kenya and from Tokyo and Seoul to Canada.
Russia managed to flip close to a century’s worth of German Ostpolitik overnight, and to get the UK to think about curtailing that sweat Russian oligarch money fueling the city of London real estate. That was not an easy feat.
Upvote
58
(58
/
0)
OneWeb can just sue the Russian government assets held in UK banks (or US banks) and get their money back that way.
Upvote
59
(59
/
0)
I'm pretty sure China graduated from BRICS a decade or more ago.
Upvote
-2
(3
/
-5)
Statistical
Ars Legatus Legionis
China is a non-starter. They steal ITAR tech leaving the company who gotten stolen from subject to ITAR sanctions. Until recently at least when it came to rocket launches Russia has had a long track record of being trustworthy something China doesn't have.
Upvote
45
(46
/
-1)
Who would be the customer if it's backed by Russian finances? Some of the sanctioning may never go away if Ukraine falls.
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
Speaking of space, Elon Musk - you know, the dude who runs spaceX, had some choice words for our sleepy, drooly, Prez:
Nah. Musk is just an anti-president guy specifically for presidents that tend to fight against Covid.
The President is trying to make a point about how great unions are for America. This is why he only mentioned Ford and GM when speaking about electric vehicles during the State of the Union address, and intentionally left out Tesla.
Whether or not unions are good or bad is up to you, but it's a political/union disagreement between Musk and Biden, and nothing to do with the pandemic.
Honestly I wasn´t aware of that situation, didn´t saw news about it. Just made the connection of his past tweets regarding presidents, that seem to had that as a connection. Stand Corrected and thanks for the info, Appreciated.
P.S: for the record, I´m on the Pro-Union side of things, in that topic.
Upvote
11
(14
/
-3)
Agreed. From the perspective of the west (which is my perspective too), becoming dependant *on* Russia exposes me to risk (supply chain loss) without reward (I'm not trying to stop myself from invading). Then again, could have some demigogue take over leadership of a western country get held in check by the rich and powerful because of the risk of economic consequence.
Whether there was an option to create dependency without interdependency I don't know.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
The military and / or oligarchs putting a bullet in Putin's head and announcing "Putin went insane, he is dead, here's the new guy and he is calling a ceasefire." would save a lot of Ukrainian AND Russian lives and provide a good path out of all this.
It's hard to imagine Putin himself finding a way out ... outside a never ending war.
Upvote
41
(42
/
-1)
OneWeb satellites are built in the US (at a OneWeb-Airbus JV near KSC), so transfer to China gets very sticky from a legal standpoint.
Upvote
18
(18
/
0)